Read more at Texas Tribune.

Texas Tech University System’s chancellor on Friday ordered campuses to phase out academic programs “centered on” sexual orientation and gender identity — a dramatically expanded policy that also places limits on what can be researched and which faculty can be hired.

Chancellor Brandon Creighton’s memo gives provosts until June 15 to identify targeted programs and requires the system’s five universities to freeze admissions and halt students from declaring majors in the phased out programs. Students already enrolled can finish their degrees.

Offerings that appear most likely to be affected include Texas Tech University’s women’s and gender studies undergraduate minor and graduate certificate, as well as women’s and gender studies minors at Midwestern State University and Angelo State University. 

The memo also says graduate theses and dissertations may center on gender identity and sexual orientation only as a temporary exception for currently enrolled students and that future faculty hiring will “prioritize recruitment in alignment with this memorandum.”

Faculty, it says, must recognize only “two human sexes” and not teach  gender identity as a spectrum or more than two genders as fact — policies Creighton introduced last year. 

In core and lower-level undergraduate courses, the memo says instructors generally cannot assign materials that are “centered on” or “include” sexual orientation or gender identity and defined the concepts:

• “Centered on” is when course content, readings, assignments or lectures that have sexual orientation or gender identity “as the primary subject, main theoretical framework, central narrative or driving pedagogical purpose.” 
• “Includes” means “these themes are present, but serve only as secondary background context, demographic data points, or minor components of a broader academic subject.” 

If an industry-standard textbook contains such content, the memo says faculty do not have to redact it, but they cannot highlight it, test students on it or spend class time on it. 

The memo makes some exceptions for upper-level undergraduate and graduate courses, including analysis of active public policy and legal disputes, historical subjects such as the AIDS epidemic where sexual orientation or gender identity is inseparable from the topic, datasets that include those variables and some clinical, counseling or psychology instruction.

The memo also says “currently employed faculty members may continue to research and publish topics of their choosing,” but future faculty will be recruited and hired in accordance with the memo’s priorities. 

Jen Shelton, an associate professor of English who has taught at Texas Tech for 25 years, said the provost’s office had repeatedly assured faculty that their research would not be affected. She said this feels like a “betrayal.”

“The good news is I think the whole university has been betrayed. I think even the provost did not expect it to look like this because it’s people from the provost’s office who have been coming to us and saying, ‘Don’t worry. This part is all going to be fine,’” Shelton said in an interview with The Texas Tribune.

Cailyn Green, a Texas Tech junior studying human development with a minor in community, family and addiction science, said the memo left her feeling that the university can no longer provide “an honest education.”

Green said one of her professors would not answer in class whether material about racial disparities in pregnancy outcomes would still be taught, instead asking to discuss it privately. 

“At the rate that we’re going, I’m not going to be able to continue learning everything that I need to know in my degree, and I won’t be able to help people,” said Green, who works in Section 8 housing, helping low-income residents connect with food, health care and other assistance.

Paul Ingram, a Texas Tech associate professor of psychological sciences, said students had been calling him all day, some saying they regretted coming to Texas Tech. He said a graduate student had already dropped out because of the earlier memos and another graduate student is writing a dissertation on gender that, under the new policy, could not be proposed again. 

He said faculty across the university are openly discussing looking for other jobs. 

“Everyone sees that the grass isn’t always greener on the other side, but this grass is looking pretty dead,” Ingram said.

Antonio Ingram, a senior counsel at the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, said the memo appears to target perspectives involving gender identity and sexual orientation for political reasons, not academic purposes, raising serious constitutional concerns because public universities cannot discriminate based on viewpoint. 

Antonio Ingram also questioned the memo’s prohibition against teaching “as absolute truth” that people are inherently racist, sexist or oppressive and that “individuals bear responsibility or guilt for actions of others of the same race or sex.” Ingram said there is no definition of “absolute truth,” creating vagueness that may deter teaching about systemic racism, reparations and the history of enslavement.

“I think in many ways, this is a doubling down on a political project that is not meant to help students. It is really meant to uphold a political worldview that, you know, Chancellor Creighton couldn’t enact legislatively and is now doing through his role as chancellor,” Ingram said.

In a statement, Creighton said he and the system’s regents are “focused on ensuring our academic programs are rigorous, relevant, and produce degrees of value.”

“That focus is matched by our unwavering support for the First Amendment and the open exchange of ideas that define a public university. Texas Tech will continue to be a national leader on both fronts,” he said.

Some students have supported the system limiting classroom discussion of sex and gender. In an October interview with the Tribune, Preston Parsons, president of the campus Turning Point USA chapter, said he believed the policy protected students and that professors who disagree should speak up outside the classroom.

“There’s a right and a wrong way to do everything, and I don’t believe the classroom is the right place to do that,” said Parsons, who wasn’t available to comment on Friday’s memo. 

Creighton served nearly two decades as a Republican state lawmaker and authored major higher education reforms before he became chancellor in November. In December, he ordered faculty to submit for review course content touching on race, sex, gender identity and sexual orientation. If campus leaders wanted to keep the information in a course and it was not required for professional licensure, certification or patient care, they had to forward it to the Board of Regents for final review. Regents were expected to take up the issue publicly at their Feb. 26 meeting but did not, leaving professors in limbo.

Speaking at the Texas Public Policy Foundation’s summit in Austin on Thursday, Creighton said Texas Tech had “built an AI algorithm” to help review courses and would release findings within days.

At the summit, Creighton said what some faculty call “academic drift” had left “quite a bit of garbage in curriculum” on university campuses across the country. He said the Texas Tech University System has “a very good plan in place” to address that.

“I believe it will produce the best curriculum in America, and I believe it will be a national model once we’re finished,” he said.

In a news release Friday, the system said that of the 1,403 courses initially identified, only 92 were reviewed by the board of regent’s Academic, Clinical and Student Affairs Committee and fewer than 60 were recommended for modification. Another 299 were “proactively modified” before reaching the committee.

Creighton has framed the push at Texas Tech as a way to steer the university toward degrees that lead to high-paying jobs in high-demand fields. He made the same arguments for bills he wrote in 2023 to ban diversity, equity and inclusion in higher education and in 2025 to expand regents’ control over curriculum.

Shelton said that view misses a central role of college, which is to teach students how to interpret the world around them, ask hard questions and think through unfamiliar problems. This memo, she said, “impoverishes” students “not just as future workers, but as human beings.”